Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.

com

Papers & Articles

Characteristics of 234 dog bite incidents in

Ireland during 2004 and 2005
E. N. O’Sullivan, B. R. Jones, K. O’Sullivan, A. J. Hanlon

Information was obtained by telephone interview from 100 dog owners whose dog had bitten a person,
and from 134 victims of bites by a dog not owned by the victim. Three-quarters of the victims were female
and aged from 21 to 60 years. The majority of the dogs were owned, male, two to six years old, over 10 kg
in bodyweight and belonged to the popular breeds: collies, cocker/springer spaniels, terrier breeds, Jack
Russell terriers, German shepherd dogs, golden retrievers and crossbreeds. The numbers of bites by the
different breeds indicated that those that inflicted the most bites were the popular breeds rather than the
breeds with any greater propensity to bite. Most attacks were rapid single bites and in 50 per cent of the
cases, neither the owner nor the victim was able to identify any signal of the dog’s intention to bite. Overall,
21 per cent of the incidents were rated as ‘serious’ and 2 per cent as ‘life threatening’. One fifth of the dogs
were euthanased as a result of the incident. Half the incidents required professional medical assistance for
the victim. Almost half the incidents took place while the victim was walking or passing close to the dog’s
territory, or while the victim was interacting with the dog at home.

AGGRESSION by dogs towards people is a significant public
health issue (Beaver 1983, 1993, Cornwell 1997). The World
Health Organization (WHO), in its technical reports on future
trends in veterinary public health (Anon 2002), specifically
refers to ‘improving human health by reducing injuries from
occupational and recreational exposure to animals’, and rec-
ognises ‘the role of companion animals and new require-
ments connected with increasing urban and peri-urban
animal populations’.
In recent years, the incidence of bites from aggressive dogs
has increased in frequency and gravity (Michelazzi and others
2004). In the USA, approximately one person in 200 is bitten
every year and approximately one in 20 dogs will bite peo-
ple (Beaver 1997). De Keuster and others (2006) reported an
annual incidence of nine to 18 bite victims per 1000 people,
and that children were three to five times more likely than
adults to be bitten by a dog. Schalamon and others (2006)
reported that the annual incidence of bites to children up to
16 years of age in Austria was 0·5 per 1000 children, and De
Keuster and others (2006) reported an annual incidence of 22
bites per 1000 children less than 15 years of age in Belgium. In
the UK, it is estimated that 5000 postal workers require medical
treatment for dog bites every year (Morgan and Palmer 2007).
Hospital records indicate that dog bite wounds are common
(Thomas and Buntine 1987). In hospital emergency depart-
Veterinary Record (2008) ments in Belgium, the frequency of dog bites in children was
163, 37-42 equivalent to approximately one quarter of all road traffic
accidents and one third of all burns-at-home cases during the
E. N. O’Sullivan, MVB, same period (De Keuster 2004a). Facial injuries treated in hos-
MVM, MRCVS, pitals in France were equally likely to be caused by fights, work
Veterinary Department, accidents and dog bites (Lebeau and others 2006). In the UK,
Cork County Council, the likelihood of being bitten by a dog is only 10 times less than
County Hall, Cork, the likelihood of having a car accident (Lakestani and others
Ireland 2005). Some dog bite incidents may be fatal. In the USA, 10 to
B. R. Jones, BVSc, FACVSc, 15 people die each year as a result of dog attacks (Pinckney
DipECVIM-Ca, MRCVS, and Kennedy 1982, Sacks and others 1989). In recent months,
A. J. Hanlon, BSc, MSc, a five-month-old baby, a five-year-old girl and a two-week-old
PhD, baby have been killed by dogs in separate incidents in the UK.
School of Agriculture, In Ireland, the most recent human fatality was a 10-year-old
Food Science and girl killed by family dogs in the mid-1980s.
Veterinary Medicine, Little research has been published on dog bite attacks in
University College Ireland. Lawlor (1977) reported children bitten by dogs in
Dublin, Belfield, Dublin Dublin, and Kneafsey and Condon (1995) described seven
4, Ireland people who required plastic surgery as a result of dog bites.
K. O’Sullivan, Specific data on dog bite incidents are not readily obtain-
Department of Statistics, able from hospital accident and emergency records in Ireland
University College Cork, (L. Keane, personal communication) and there is no official
Ireland reporting mechanism for such incidents.
This study was undertaken to form the basis of a public
health programme focused on the prevention of dog bites. To
obtain representative data, it was decided that information
would be obtained from both the owners of dogs that had
bitten somebody and the victims of bites inflicted by dogs
not owned by the victim.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental design
A telephone survey of people who had been bitten by either
a familiar dog (owner group) or an unfamiliar dog (non-
owner group) was undertaken between January 2004 and
April 2005. The survey was based on questionnaires contain-
ing 147 questions for the owner group and 31 questions for
the non-owner group.
The survey questions were based on the questionnaires of
Guy and others (2001b) and on the BSAVA Canine Behaviour
Questionnaire (2002). Minor amendments were made to the
questionnaires after a small pilot study. The non-owners’ ques-
tionnaire (NOQ) was divided into three sections: information
about the dog, details of the bite incident, and details of the
bite injuries and their consequences for the dog and the victim.
The owner’s questionnaire (OQ) contained an additional three
sections to obtain data on the history and management of the
dog; these data are not considered in this paper.
When there had been more than one incident involving
the same dog, the respondent was requested to provide infor-
mation about the most recent incident. In cases in which the
owner’s dog had bitten a non-family member, some details
of the incident, the injuries and their consequences could not
be ascertained; the answers to these questions were entered
as ‘don’t know’.
Admission criterion
A biting incident was defined as when ‘a visible mark was
left on the victim’s skin’ (Guy and others 2001b). Incidents
of snapping and grabbing of clothes without leaving visible
marks on the skin were excluded.
Data collection
Starting in January 2004, a dedicated telephone number,
the Dog Bite Line (DBL) was established. It was publicised in
local and national print and radio media, and members of
the public who had been bitten by a dog or whose dog had
bitten somebody were requested to telephone the DBL and
participate in the study.

The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008

 Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com

Papers & Articles

People who telephoned the DBL heard a recorded message TABLE 1: Number of dogs that bit each victim, and the age and sex of the dog in the 100
emphasising the admission criterion, explaining confidential- incidents in the owner group and the 134 incidents in the non-owner group
ity and instructing the caller to leave a name, contact number Number of dogs involved per incident, Owner group Non-owner group (134 dogs)
and suitable contact time for a telephone interview. age and sex of the dogs (100 dogs) Number (%)
The completion time for the NOQ was 10 minutes and
Number
it was always completed during the first telephone contact.
1 100 126 (94)
For the OQ, the completion time was 45 to 55 minutes and 2 0 6 (4·5)
these interviews were frequently scheduled for late evening 3 0 2 (1·5)
(20.00 to 23.00) so that the respondent could complete the Age
interview without undue distraction or time constraint. All <6 months 2 0
the telephone questionnaires were completed by the same 6 months to 2 years 29 22 (16·4)
interviewer (E. O. S.). A total of 134 NOQs and 100 OQs were >2 to 6 years 44 69 (51·5)
completed. ≥6 to 13 years 25 40 (29·8)
Not known 0 3 (2·2)
Data on the direct costs of the medical treatments
Sex
required by the victims of dog bites were obtained from the Intact male 39 68 (50·7)
Public Health Department of the Health Service Executive. Intact female 9 18 (13·4)
This information was compiled by specialist public health Neutered male 33 1 (0·7)
doctors using data derived from discussion with colleagues, Neutered female 18 4 (3)
audited hospital accounts, figures from the Department of Not known 1 43 (32)
Health and Children Casemix Unit, and drug cost data from
the Monthly Index of Medical Specialities.
Data on the populations of different dog breeds were
obtained from the Cork County Council dog license data- old (16 per cent v 2 per cent) and to children five to 12 years
base. old (18 per cent v 11 per cent). When these two age categories
were combined, there was a significant difference between the
Data analysis non-owner group (34 per cent) and the owner group (13 per
The questionnaires were individually coded and the data cent) (P=0·001).
were entered into a Microsoft Excel database. On the basis
of a qualitative assessment of the incident and the injuries The dogs
inflicted, each incident was assigned to one or more of the The characteristics of the dogs involved are given in Tables
category headings ‘not serious’, ‘serious’ and ‘potentially life 1, 2 and 3.
threatening’. Incidents categorised as ‘serious’ had at least In both groups, dogs weighing more than 10 kg accounted
three of the following five characteristics: head and/or neck for more than 70 per cent of the bite incidents. In the non-
injuries; injuries that required treatment in hospital; an overt owner group there were more dogs weighing over 20 kg
and intense display of aggression by the dog; a sustained (48 per cent v 30 per cent in the owner group) and the owner
attack; and multiple bite injuries. Incidents categorised as group had a higher proportion of dogs weighing 10 to 20 kg.
‘potentially life threatening’ were categorised as serious and There was a significant difference between the weights of the
had at least two of the following additional characteristics: dogs in the two groups (P=0·022).
an attack by more than one dog; the victim was knocked or The breeds of dogs most frequently reported for bite inci-
had fallen to the ground; and no assistance was available from dents in both groups were similar (Tables 2 and 3).
other people. The six most popular breeds of dogs in Cork, in descend-
The data were analysed by using the Statistical Package ing order, were collie, terrier breeds, labrador, Jack Russell ter-
for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Frequencies and percent- rier, cocker/springer spaniel and crossbreeds. The six breeds
ages were used to summarise the categorical variables. of dogs with the highest bite rate (based on the number of
Chi-squared (Pearson’s) tests were used to investigate reported incidents by a breed that took place in Cork County
associations between groups (owner and non-owner) and divided by the population of that breed in Cork County),
characteristics of the victim or dog. For victim or dog char-
acteristics that consisted of two categories, Yate’s continuity
correction or Fisher’s exact test was applied where appro- TABLE 2: Breeds of dogs most frequently reported in 100 biting
incidents by the owner group
priate. All the tests were two tailed, and significance was
accepted if P<0·05. Breed Number of incidents

Collie 18
Cocker/springer spaniel 13
RESULTS Terrier breeds 9
Jack Russell terrier 7
Seventy-five per cent of the respondents in the owner group Golden retriever 6
and 73 per cent of those in the non-owner group were German shepherd dog 5
female. Dachshund 5

The victims
Sixty-three per cent of the owner group victims were the TABLE 3: Breeds of dogs most frequently reported in
134 biting incidents by the non-owner group
dog’s owner and/or other family members, and 75 per cent
of the non-owner group respondents described the victim as Breed Number (%) of incidents
not known to the dog. In the owner group, 52 per cent of the Collie 24 (18)
victims were female, and in the non-owner group, 65 per cent Terrier breeds 22 (16)
of the victims were female. German shepherd dog 15 (11)
In both groups, over 50 per cent of the reported bite Jack Russell terrier 13 (10)
incidents involved victims who were 21 to 60 years old. In Crossbreed 12 (9)
comparison with the owner group, the non-owner group Cocker/springer spaniel 9 (7)
reported more incidents affecting children less than five years

The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008

 Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com

Papers & Articles

tended to increase from spring through to summer, and then

decline in autumn and winter.
Owner group Non-owner group
Physical injuries, and medical and psychological
consequences for the victims
4% 21% Ninety-two per cent of the owner group and 78 per cent of
the non-owner group were bitten once, but bleeding from
the bite injury occurred more frequently in the non-owner
group (74 per cent) than in the owner group (65 per cent).
Considering the nature of the attack, 27 per cent of the non-
owner group suffered multiple bites or sustained attacks,
whereas only 10 per cent of the owner group suffered such
attacks (P=0·002).
3% 3% The distributions of the bite injuries to the victims in the
12%
9% two groups are shown in Fig 1. There were more bites to the
back of the leg and to the head and/or neck of the non-owner
group, while there were more bites to the hand in the owner
38% 17% group.
5% 5% Thirteen per cent of the non-owner victims were admitted
9% 10% to Accident and Emergency (A&E) departments and 17 per
cent of them required major medical treatment and follow
up, whereas only 7 per cent of the owner victims were admit-
ted to A&E departments and none of them required major
medical treatment (Table 4). The differences between the
proportions requiring hospital A&E and major medical treat-
ment taken together, and between the proportions requiring
21% 24%
major medical treatment considered alone, were significant
(P<0·001).
In the non-owner group, the biting incident was catego-
rised as ‘serious’ in 28 (21 per cent) of the 134 incidents,
FIG 1: Percentage distribution of the 11% 8%
bites inflicted on the bodies of the whereas only one of the 100 owner-group incidents was cat-
victims in the owner and non-owner egorised as serious. None of the owner group incidents was
groups. Arrows denote rear of body life threatening, but three of the non-owner group incidents
were categorised as life threatening.
The direct medical cost of all the dog bite injuries was
in descending order were: papillon, Brittany spaniel, Kerry estimated to be €100,000.
blue terrier, Newfoundland, weimaraner and Pekingese. Ninety-one per cent of the owner group incidents and 84
The six breeds with the lowest bite rate were the Cavalier per cent of the non-owner group incidents did not result in
King Charles, beagle, bichon frise, Staffordshire bull terrier, any absence from work or school.
samoyed and Pyrenean mountain dog. Approximately 90 per cent of the victims reported that
In the non-owner group, 87 per cent of the dogs were they were not ordinarily afraid of dogs before they were bit-
allegedly owned, as evidenced by the wearing of a collar, the ten. The bite incident increased the victims’ fear of dogs in
presence of the owner at the time of the incident or by the both groups, but significantly more of the non-owner group
victim’s knowledge of the dog. than of the owner group became fearful (56 per cent v 20
per cent).
Location and time of the incidents
There was a significant association between the groups and Interactions between the victim and the dog
location of the incidents (P=<0·001). In the non-owner immediately before and after the incident
group, 52 per cent of the incidents occurred in a public place, The majority of the owner group victims were interact-
and in the owner group, 49 per cent of the incidents took ing with the dog at home, whereas the non-owner group
place in the dog’s own house or garden. In both groups, the victims were encroaching on the dog’s territory (Tables 5,
biting incidents were equally likely to have occurred in rural 6), but 70 per cent of the owner group and 81 per cent of
or urban/surburban areas. the non-owner group described the bite incident as unpro-
The incidents occurred most frequently on Wednesdays voked.
(24 per cent in the owner group and 22 per cent in the non- In 39 per cent of the owner group and 42 per cent of the
owner group) and at weekends, and most of them occurred non-owner group, the dog’s demeanour immediately before
between 12.00 and 18.00. The number of bite incidents it bit the victim was reported to be overtly aggressive, the dog
giving a warning bark or posture. However, almost 50 per
cent of the dogs were described as having given no ‘warning’
TABLE 4: Medical consequences for the 100 owner group and 134 non-owner group victims of their intention to bite.
of dog bites In the non-owner group, 52 per cent of the dogs were overtly
Owner group Non-owner group aggressive immediately after biting the victim whereas in the
Medical consequence Number Number (%) owner group, only 39 per cent were overtly aggressive. More of
Not known 2 0 the dogs in the owner group postured submissively after biting
Visit to doctor and anti-tetanus injection 40 53 (40) than did the dogs in the non-owner group (22 per cent v 5 per
Visit to hospital Accident and Emergency unit 7 18 (13) cent) and this difference was significant (P=0·008).
Major surgical and medical treatment and follow up 0 23 (17)
– plastic surgery, psychotherapy Other dogs present during the incident
No professional assistance 51 40 (30) In the owner group, 76 per cent of the incidents involved only
the biting dog, whereas in the non-owner group, only 54 per

The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008

 Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com

Papers & Articles

TABLE 5: Type and frequency of actions of the 100 bite victims TABLE 6: Type and frequency of actions of the 134 bite victims and/or dogs in the non-owner
and/or dogs in the owner group immediately before being group immediately before being bitten
bitten
Action Frequency (%)
Action Frequency
Victim encroaching on dog’s territory 60 (45)
Victim interacting with the dog at home 40 Passing dog’s territory on road/pathway 34 (25)
While dog was on a chair 24 Entering/leaving dog’s property 15 (11)
While dog was on a bed 5 Delivering/service to dog’s property 11 (8)
While dog was playing 9 Victim in friend’s house, interacting with dog 33 (25)
While dog was eating 2 Victim trying to stop dog fight 14 (10)
Victim restraining dog during fight/aggressive 14 Victim interacting with dog loose in a public place 9 (7)
encounter with other dog Victim attacked by dog entering victim’s property 5 (3·7)
Victim delivering/service to dog’s property 12 Victim trying to catch dog in public place 3 (2·2)
Victim punishing the dog 7 Victim cycling past dog’s territory 2 (1·5)
Dog protecting owner/family 7 Victim walking on beach, dog loose 2 (1·5)
Dog attacked well-known visitor 7 Dog entered victim’s car and attacked 2 (1·5)
Victim accidentally inflicted pain on dog 1 Victim interacting with mating dogs 1 (0·7)
Victim not doing anything connected with the dog 3 (2·2)

cent of the incidents involved only one dog; this difference

TABLE 7: Desired consequences for the dog chosen by the 100 owner group and the
was significant (P=0·001). 134 non-owner group respondents

Consequences for the dog Owner group Non-owner group

Desired consequence Number Number (%)
More of the non-owner group (40 per cent v 22 per cent)
felt that the dog should be euthanased. More of the owner Euthanasia 22 53 (39·6)
group chose behaviour therapy for the dog (41 per cent v 16 Behavioural therapy 41 21 (15·7)
per cent) (Table 7). Chain/restrain dog 2 6 (4·5)
Surrender to dog warden 0 3 (2·2)
In fact, 14 per cent of the owner group dogs were eutha-
Re-home 1 3 (2·2)
nased, compared with 21 per cent of the non-owner group Admission to rescue facility 0 2 (1·5)
dogs (Table 8). In the non-owner group 37 per cent of Dog muzzled 8 23 (17·2)
respondents did not know what happened to the biting dog. Restraint and behavioural therapy 11 13 (9·7)
However, 27 per cent of the non-owner group and 29 per cent No consequence 15 10 (7·5)
of the owner group reported ‘no change’ as the consequence
for the biting dog.
Significantly more of the owner group (7 per cent) than of
the non-owner group (0·7 per cent) chose the use of a muzzle In both groups, more females than males were bitten
as the outcome (P=0·022). by dogs. In contrast, other studies have recorded that more
males than females are bitten (August 1988, Podberscek and
Blackshaw 1990, Wake and others 2006) and more boys than
DISCUSSION girls (Weiss and others 1998). The preponderance of female
victims in this study may have been because more of the
To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to bring female victims were aware of the contact telephone number,
together data provided by the owners of dogs that have bit- or because close interactions were more common between
ten other people and data provided by the victims of bites dogs and females.
by dogs not owned by the victim. A telephone survey of this All of the breeds involved in the biting incidents have been
nature is highly dependent on the respondent’s interpreta- identified in earlier studies (Beaver 1993, Hart and Hart 1985,
tion of the dog’s behaviour, their recollections of any event 1997, Blackshaw 1991, Wright 1991, Shewell and Nancarrow
and the time since the incident took place. The respondents’ 1991, Guy and others 2001a, b, Wake and others 2006). The
replies may have been biased for a variety of reasons, such Cork County Dog Licence database was used to assess the
as fear of litigation, a tendency to exaggerate, and the desire popularity of each dog breed in the County. The licence sys-
not to reveal undesirable characteristics of their own dog tem requires all dog owners to obtain an annual license for
or themselves. Furthermore, self-selected volunteers may each dog, and it is estimated that compliance with the require-
have different views from those of the general population. ment is only approximately 60 per cent (C. Keohane, personal
Nevertheless, in the absence of official reporting of dog bite
incidents, voluntary responses remain the most suitable
method for obtaining information that can not be obtained
TABLE 8: Known consequences for the dog chosen by the 100 owner group and the
through the more commonly used veterinary or hospital- 134 non-owner group respondents
based sources.
Owner group Non-owner group
As in the studies by Beaver (1983) and Guy and others Known consequence Number Number (%)
(2001a), more adults from both the owner and non-owner
groups tended to be bitten, but there were significant num- Euthanasia 14 28 (20·9)
bers of victims less than 12 years of age in the non-owner Behavioural therapy 28 3 (2·2)
group. Other studies have reported that children up to 15 Chain/restrained dog 5 6 (4·5)
Surrender to dog warden 0 6 (4·5)
years of age (mean five years) are victims more frequently
Re-homed 5 2 (1·5)
(Thompson 1997, Weiss and others 1998, De Keuster and Admission to rescue facility 1 0
others 2005, Lakestani and others 2005, Wake and others Wore a muzzle when exercised 7 1 (0·7)
2006). Members of the public whose children have been bit- Restraint and behavioural therapy 4 1 (0·7)
ten by another person’s dog are possibly more likely to report Don’t know 3 50 (37·3)
the incident than are the owners of dogs that have bitten chil- No consequence 29 36 (26·9)
dren, and this difference may be due to a fear of litigation or Lost dog/neutered dog 4 1 (0·7)
concern for their children by owners.

The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008

Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com
communication). The data are therefore incomplete, but they
nevertheless indicate that the breeds frequently reported for
biting were popular breeds, rather than breeds with a greater
propensity to bite.
The incidents were equally likely to occur in a rural setting
or in an urban/surburban setting. Other studies have sug-
gested that incidents in an urban/suburban setting are more
common because of the increased scope for interactions
between people and dogs (Parrish and others 1959, Beck
and others 1975, Podberscek and Blackshaw 1990, Overall
and Love 2001). However, in New Zealand, Wake and others
(2006) found that a disproportionate number of dog bites
occurred in rural areas and they suggested that this was partly
because in rural areas there were 245 dogs per 1000 people,
whereas in urban areas there were only 87 dogs per 1000, and
partly because there was evidence that rural dog owners were
less likely to confine their dogs. In Ireland, exercising or walk-
ing dogs in rural locations is very popular and may result in
more incidents of territorial aggression in rural locations.
Guy and others (2001a) reported that almost 10 per cent
of household members bitten by dogs needed a consultation
with a medical practitioner. Wake and others (2006) reported
that 19 per cent of bites required medical attention. The higher
proportion requiring medical assistance in the present study
may be due to the fact that the respondents were self-selected;
respondents who suffered more severe bites may have been
more motivated to participate. This may explain why 17 per
cent of the victims required hospitalisation, whereas only
2 to 4 per cent required hospitalisation in the studies by
August (1988) and Weiss and others (1998).
Wright (1985) reported that in the USA, the fatality rate
from dog bites was 0·2 per cent. Even allowing for possible
overestimation due to the limitations of this study, the poten-
tial 2 per cent fatality rate underlines the potential danger to
human life posed by dog attacks in Ireland.
The results of this study agree with the findings of Boyd
and others (2004), who reported that almost half of the adults
in a population were fearful of dogs as a result of attacks or
aggressive behaviour. De Keuster (2004b) reported an intense
fear of dogs as a result of being bitten, and De Keuster and
others (2005) concluded that child victims should be consid-
ered at risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder.
The results particularly highlight the relationship between
encroaching on a dog’s territory and bite incidents. Many of
the victims were passing the dog’s territory, or entering or
leaving the dog’ territory when they were bitten. It is natu-
ral for a dog to defend its territory from a perceived threat,
and many dog owners reward and reinforce such defensive
behaviour for reasons of security. Unless a territorially defen-
sive dog is properly trained or is restrained in some way, the
likelihood of a bite incident is considerably increased by such
training.
Almost half the dogs were described as giving no observed
‘warning’ of their intention to bite. Other studies (Beck and
others 1975, Lockwood and Rindy 1987, De Keuster 2004a)
have reported the victim’s contention that the bite attack was
not connected with any action on their part. However, a dog
is unlikely to attack and bite without provocation or with-
out giving some warning. Many dog owners and bite victims
are unable to recognise the subtle warning body postures of
a dog, and the fact that human actions, apparently uncon-
nected with the dog, may be interpreted as a challenge to
the dog’s dominant status (Beck and others 1975, Lockwood
and Rindy 1987, Overall 1997, Shepherd 2002, Landsberg and
others 2003, De Keuster 2004a). However, the dog’s normal
body posturing in response to a perceived challenge may
often be dispensed with as a result of behaviour learned from
previous encounters (Mertens 2002).
The findings relating to the desired consequence for the
biting dog were not unexpected. A muzzle is an inexpensive
The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008
Papers & Articles
and effective way to ensure human safety from a dog bite.
Owners choosing behaviour therapy may already be con-
scious of a behaviour problem, which they believe may have
led to the bite incident. Even when faced with aggression that
threatens the physical safety of the family, owners often expe-
rience conflict about what they should do (Stawasz 1997).
Several studies have recorded that many owners of dogs
that have bitten people respond by re-homing them or send-
ing them to dog shelters and dog wardens (Reisner and others
1994, Hunthausen 1997, Weiss and others 1998, Butcher and
others 2002). In the present study, these two options were
rarely chosen.
Many aggressive dogs are euthanased (Reisner and others
1994, Patronek and others 1996), but the 20 per cent eutha-
nasia rate in the present study is considerably higher than
the 5 per cent rate quoted by Wake and others (2006). The
same authors cite a higher ‘no change’ outcome of 66 per
cent. Many of the respondents in the present study stated that
after they had reflected on the bite incident, they were less
likely to consider that it merited euthanasia. If euthanasia is
delayed after a biting incident, the owners may be influenced
by the dog’s good behaviour (Marston and Bennett 2003) and
their resolve may weaken.
Many of the findings were similar to those of other stud-
ies, but there are some interesting differences, including the
breeds with the highest bite rate and the fact that there were
more female victims than males, a higher rate of euthana-
sia for the dogs, more victims sought medical assistance and
more victims suffered serious and potentially life-threatening
injuries.
In terms of protecting the public, it is relevant that almost
half the incidents were the result of aggression either by
uncontrolled dogs on private property or in public places, or
by dogs at home during normal everyday activities. As sug-
gested by De Keuster and others (2006), Mills and Levine
(2006) and Morgan and Palmer (2007), the education of
the public, and particularly children, about the behaviour
of dogs should prevent a significant proportion of dog bite
incidents.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the Veterinary Department, Cork
County Council for facilitating this study. The assistance
of the department’s dog wardens and administrative staff
is gratefully acknowledged. The authors particularly thank
Dr Norma Guy for her assistance with the questionnaire, and
all the dog owners and dog bite victims who participated in
the study.
References
ANON (2002) World Health Organization Technical Report Series, 907. Future
trends in veterinary public health. Geneva. pp 4-9
AUGUST, J. R. (1988) Dog and cat bites. Journal of the American Veterinary
Medical Association 193, 1394-1398
BEAVER, B. V. (1983) Clinical classification of canine aggression. Applied
Animal Ethology 10, 35-43
BEAVER, B. V. (1997) Human-canine interactions: a summary of perspectives.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 210, 1148-1150
BEAVER, B. V. (1993) Profile of dogs presented for aggression. Journal of the
American Animal Hospital Association 29, 564-569
BECK, A. M., LORING, H. & LOCKWOOD, R. (1975) The ecology of dog bite
injury in St Louis, Missouri. Public Health Reports 90, 262-267
BLACKSHAW, J. K. (1991) An overview of types of aggressive behaviour
in dogs and methods of treatment. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30,
351-361
BOYD, C. M., FOTHERINGHAM, B., LITCHFIELD, C., MCBRYDE, I.,
METZE, R. J. C., SCANLON, P., SOMERS, R. & WINEFIELD, A. H. (2004)
Fear of dogs in a community sample: effects of age, gender and prior experi-
ence of canine aggression. Anthrozoos 17, 146-166
 Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com
Papers & Articles
BSAVA (2002) Canine behaviour questionnaire. In BSAVA Manual of Canine
and Feline Behavioural Medicine. Eds D. F. Horwitz, D. S. Mills, S. E. Heath.
Quedgeley, BSAVA
BUTCHER, R., DEMEESTER, R. & RADFORD, M. (2002) Dangerous dogs
– are we getting it right? European Journal of Companion Animal Practice
12, 41-48
CORNWELL, J. M. (1997) Dog bite prevention: responsible pet ownership
and animal safety. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
210, 1147-1148
DE KEUSTER, T. (2004a) Child victims of dog bite treated in emergency
departments. The future of interdisciplinary strategies. European Journal of
Companion Animal Practice 14, 26-28
DE KEUSTER, T. (2004b) ESVCE-dog bite prevention project. In Proceedings of
the 10th European Congress on Companion Animal Behavioural Medicine.
Ed S. Heath. Osella, C. Cremona. pp 43-47
DE KEUSTER, T., DECOCK, I. & MOONS, C. P. H. (2005) Dog bite preven-
tion – how a blue dog can help. European Journal of Companion Animal
Practice 115, 136-139
DE KEUSTER, T., LAMOUREUX, J. & KAHN, A. (2006) Epidemiology of dog
bites: a Belgian experience of canine behaviour and public health concerns.
Veterinary Journal 172, 482-487
GUY, N. C., LEUSCHER, U. A., DOHOO, S. E., SPANGLER, E., MILLER, J.
B., DOHOO, I. R. & BATE, L. A. (2001a) A case series of biting dogs: char-
acteristics of the dogs, their behaviour, and their victims. Applied Animal
Behaviour Science 74, 43-57
GUY, N. C., LEUSCHER, U. A., DOHOO, S. E., SPANGLER, E., MILLER, J. B.,
DOHOO, I. R. & BATE, L. A. (2001b) Risk factors for dog bites to owners in a
general veterinary caseload. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74, 29-42
HART, B. L. & HART, L. A. (1985) Selecting pet dogs on the basis of clus-
ter analysis of breed behaviour profiles and gender. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association 186, 1181-1185
HART, B. L. & HART, L. A. (1997) Selecting, raising and caring for dogs to
avoid problem aggression. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical
Association 210, 1129-1134
HUNTHAUSEN, W. (1997) Effects of aggressive behaviour on canine welfare.
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 210, 1134-1136
KNEAFSEY, B. & CONDON, K. C. (1995) Severe dog bite injuries, introducing
the concept of pack attack: a literature review and seven case reports. Injury
26, 37-41
LAKESTANI, N. N., WARAN, N., VERGA, M. & PHILLIPS, C. (2005) Dog bites
in children. European Journal of Companion Animal Practice 15, 1330-1335
LANDSBERG, G., HUNTHAUSEN, W. & ACKERMAN, L. (2003) Handbook
of Behaviour Problems of the Dog and Cat. London, W. B. Saunders.
pp 385-426
LAWLOR, D. L. (1977) Dog bites in children in Dublin. Irish Medical Journal
70, 120-121
LEBEAU, J., KANKU, V., DUROURE, F., MORAND, B., SADEK, H. &
RAPHAËL, B. (2006) Facial injuries treated in the Grenoble University
Hospital. Epidemiological analysis of 961 patients managed in one year. Revue
de Stomatologie et de Chirurgie Maxillo-faciale 107, 23-29 (In French)
LOCKWOOD, R. & RINDY, K. (1987) Are pit bulls different? An analysis of
the pit bull controversy. Anthrozoos 1, 2-8
MARSTON, L. C. & BENNETT, P. C. (2003) Re-forging the bond-towards suc-
cessful canine adoption. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 83, 227-245
MERTENS, P. A. (2002) Canine aggression. In BSAVA Manual of Canine and
Feline Behavioural Medicine. Eds D. F. Horwitz, D. S. Mills, S. E. Heath.
Quedgeley, BSAVA. pp 195-215
MICHELAZZI, M., RIVA, J., PALESTRINI, C. & VERGA, M. (2004) Dog
aggression in the present social environment: approach to the problem and
operational aspects. In Proceedings of the 10th European congress on com-
panion animal behavioural medicine. Ed S. Heath. C. Osella. Cremona, Italy.
pp 25-27
MILLS, D. S. & LEVINE, E. (2006) The need for a co-ordinated scientific
approach to the investigation of dog bite injuries. Veterinary Journal 172,
398-399
MORGAN, M. & PALMER, J. (2007) Dog bites. British Medical Journal 334,
413-417
OVERALL, K. L. (1997) Canine aggression. In Clinical Behavioural Medicine
for small animals. St Louis, Mosby. pp 88-125
OVERALL, K. L. & LOVE, M. (2001) Dog bites to humans – demography,
epidemiology, injury and risk. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical
Association 218, 1923-1934
PARRISH, H. M., CLACK, F. B., BROBST, D. & MOCK, J. F. (1959) Epidemiology
of dog bites. Public Health Reports 74, 891-903
PATRONEK, G. J., GLICKMAN, L. T., BECK, A. M., MCCABE, G. P. & ECKER,
C. (1996) Risk factors for relinquishment of dogs to an animal shelter. Journal
of the American Veterinary Medical Association 209, 572-581
PINCKNEY, L. E. & KENNEDY, L. A. (1982) Traumatic deaths from dog
attacks in the United States. Pediatrics 69, 193-196
PODBERSCEK, A. L. & BLACKSHAW, J. K. (1990) Dog bites: Why, when and
where? Australian Veterinary Practitioner 20, 182-187
REISNER, I. R., ERB, H. N. & HOUPT, K. A. (1994) Risk factors for behaviour-
related euthanasia among dominant-aggressive dogs: 110 cases (1989-1992)
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 205, 855-863
SACKS, J. J., SATTIN, R. W. & BONZO, S. E. (1989) Dog bite-related fatalities
from 1979 through 1988. Journal of the American Medical Association 262,
1489-1492
SHEWELL, P. C. & NANCARROW, J. D. (1991) Dogs that bite. British Medical
Journal 303, 1512
SCHALAMON, J., AINOEDHOFER, H., SINGER, G., PETNEHAZY, T., MAYR,
J., KISS, K. & HÖLLWARTH, M. E. (2006) Analysis of dog bites in children
who are younger than 17 years. Pediatrics 117, 374-379
SHEPHERD, K. (2002) Development of behaviour, social behaviour and com-
munication in dogs. In BSAVA Manual of Canine and Feline Behavioural
Medicine. Eds D. F. Horwitz, D. S. Mills, S. E. Heath. Quedgeley, BSAVA.
pp 8-20
STAWASZ, R. L. S. (1997) Social work and behavioural problems: implica-
tions for treating the problem pet and for the family. In Clinical Behavioural
Medicine for Small Animals. Ed K. L. Overall. St Louis, Mosby. pp 354-
366
THOMAS, P. R. & BUNTINE, J. A. (1987) Man’s best friend?: a review of the
Austin Hospital’s experience with dog bites. Medical Journal of Australia 147,
536-540
THOMPSON, P. G. (1997) The public health impact of dog attacks in a major
Australian city. Medical Journal of Australia 167, 129-132
WAKE, A. A. F., STAFFORD, K. J. & MINOT, E. O. (2006) The experience of
dog bites: A survey of veterinary science and veterinary nursing students.
New Zealand Veterinary Journal 54, 141-146
WEISS, H. B., FRIEDMAN, D. I. & COBEN, J. H. (1998) Incidence of dog
bite injuries treated in emergency departments. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association 279, 51-53
WRIGHT, J. C. (1991) Canine aggression toward people: bite scenarios and
prevention. Veterinary Clinics of North America. Small Animal Practice 21,
299-314
WRIGHT, J. C. (1985) Severe attacks by dogs: characteristics of the dogs, the
victims, and the attack settings. Public Health Reports 100, 55-61
The Veterinary Record, July 12, 2008
 Downloaded from veterinaryrecord.bmj.com on December 3, 2013 - Published by group.bmj.com

Characteristics of 234 dog bite incidents in

Ireland during 2004 and 2005
E. N. O'Sullivan, B. R. Jones, K. O'Sullivan, et al.

Veterinary Record 2008 163: 37-42

doi: 10.1136/vr.163.2.37

Updated information and services can be found at:

http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/163/2/37.full.html

These include:
References This article cites 41 articles, 3 of which can be accessed free at:
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/163/2/37.full.html#ref-list-1

Email alerting Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in
service the box at the top right corner of the online article.

Notes

To request permissions go to:

http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

To order reprints go to:

http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform

To subscribe to BMJ go to:

http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/